Welcome to this week’s highlights from the Technical Committee. Just like every other week, this has been quite a busy one for the community and the efforts to enhance our governance model keep moving forward.<\/p>\n
The tc-approved-release<\/i> tag was mentioned<\/a> in the last edition of these highlights. The discussions has moved a step forward and the first, basic, version of this tag has been approved. You can read the full version here<\/a>. Initially, all projects that have the tag-integrated-release<\/i> tag also get the tc-approved-release<\/i> tag.<\/p>\n A good part of the last meeting – from 20:07 to 20:38<\/a> – was spent discussing this tag and we’ll do the same in this post. Lets start by describing what this tag is trying to achieve.<\/p>\n The tag aims to define the minimum set of required projects to have a running OpenStack Compute deployment. The motivation behind this tag comes from the Kilo mid-cycle OPs meetup where some of the participants suggested that this is something the community should dictate. Although there’s no disagreement on how important and valuable this information is for the community, there seem to be different opinions about who should provide this information and how it should be provided. This means there are 2 questions that need to be answered in order to reach consensus on this matter:<\/p>\n Should the TC have an opinion on start here for this use case<\/strong> today? There were 2 versions of question number one. The previous version didn’t include the use case<\/i> bit, which turned out being a deal breaker for several members of the technical committee. The use case<\/i> clause indicates that the TC could express an opinion on starting points for different scenarios, such as compute, object-storage, or bare metal, instead of providing a single starting point for a specific use case. Some of the current opinions are:<\/p>\n The information provided by this tag has nothing to do with the governance The TC voted on the first question and the results were in favor for the TC having an opinion on this matter. Question number 2, however, remains open and it’ll likely be discussed in future meetings. If you have an opinion on how these starting points should be communicated, please do provide them on this<\/a> review.<\/p>\n The group behind i18n has taken a step forward in their organization and they are now an OpenStack Project Team<\/a>. The TC and the community are excited to have an official i18n team. Their mission is “To make OpenStack ubiquitously accessible to people of all language backgrounds” and we fully support them.<\/p>\n The TC also discussed a proposal adding distribution packaging to OpenStack<\/a>. We decided that the packaging team proposal should be set to Work In Progress until the plan is more fully described with infrastructure considerations. There’s a lot of activity on the mailing list so please join in if you’re interested in the outcome.<\/p>\n Please take a look at the mailing list discussions<\/a> for changing the release cycles for certain projects such as Ironic.<\/p>\n In closing, for a bit of fun take a look at the M names<\/a> proposed for the next release cycle including Japanese characters inline. We’re looking forward to the vote.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Welcome to this week’s highlights from the Technical Committee. Just like every other week, this has been quite a busy one for the community and the efforts to enhance our governance model keep moving forward. The tc-approved-release tag has been approved The tc-approved-release tag was mentioned in the last edition of these highlights. The discussions… Read more »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[7,28,508],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6897"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6897"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6897\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6923,"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6897\/revisions\/6923"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.openstack.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Compute kernel tag<\/h2>\n
\nIf yes, How should this opinion be expressed\/represented?<\/p>\n
\nThe TC should know how to answer questions like: “What’s the minimum required set to get OpenStack running?” If the TC can’t, who else is going to do it?
\nThe TC could have an opinion on different starting points but it should not dictate a one-and-only entry point.<\/p>\ni18n is now an OpenStack Project Team<\/h2>\n
Consideration of the Packaging team proposal<\/h2>\n
Potential release cycle overhaul<\/h2>\n